Drawing wire on a layer

"Olin Lathrop" <eagle@embedinc.com> wrote in message

news:hjk909$m6o$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

Morten Leikvoll wrote on Mon, 25 January 2010 07:29

Every time you comment my stuff, you are teaching me to do things YOUR

way..

Please stop that

 

You seem to be going out of your way to use Eagle in ways it wasn't

intended, then complain when it doesn't work.  Try embracing the tool

instead of fighting it.

I try. Strangely enough I learn new things even after 10+ years of use.

Quote:

I used this to strengthen some polygon fills.

 

It's still not clear what "this" is.  Maybe a picture would help.

The topic is already dying, but I am referring to the fact that drawing

wires at existing signals, kinda functions as a route. The new wire will

become a signal with the name of the net you started drawing from (and/or

to). This "net merging" is what behaves strange as it doesnt compare the

layer of the wire you draw with the layer of the signals you draw from/to.

Since points can have several nets on one point (in different layers), this

fails in those cases.

Quote:

The general spacing I use doesnt make the fill between some via's, but

I accept some smaller clearance at some places, and therefore use wire's

between those via's (and rename it to whatever I want) to make the

airwire disappear (after ratsnest).

 

So if I understand this right, you have a polygon with a certain spacing

parameter.  That spacing causes the polygon to be broken up near some vias

because there isn't enough clearance to flow between them?  And in some of

those cases you want to manually add the trace because you know the

clearance is really OK in those areas?  If that's the case, you could have

just said so.  If not, then I'm still confused and a better description is

still needed.

The problem was that there wasn't a problem getting things done. It was just

a weird behavior from eagle in some special cases.

If the above guess as to what you really want is correct, then I still

don't see why you need to use WIRE instead of ROUTE as intended by Eagle.

There is a better chance Eagle understands the connections made by ROUTE,

and the user interface regarding airwires should be clearer.  Have you

tried ROUTE?  Either way you will get lots of DRC errors, so that

shouldn't

be the difference.

Will ROUTE work from a polygon edge? I think not. A WIRE will, but it has to

be renamed.

 

Quote:

You may discuss the correctness of this, but I'm not interested in

hearing right now

 

You started this thread.  Discussing the correct or best use of the tool

is

legitimate and relevant, whether you wish to hear it or not.

I think I got Cadsoft's attention on the "problem" I saw, and I learned that

I should get used to using ROUTE while holding CTRL in the other cases where

I've been using WIRE. Case closed..?

"Olin Lathrop" <eagle@embedinc.com> wrote in message

news:hjk909$m6o$1@cheetah.cadsoft.de...

Morten Leikvoll wrote on Mon, 25 January 2010 07:29

Every time you comment my stuff, you are teaching me to do things YOUR

way..

Please stop that

 

You seem to be going out of your way to use Eagle in ways it wasn't

intended, then complain when it doesn't work.  Try embracing the tool

instead of fighting it.

I try. Strangely enough I learn new things even after 10+ years of use.

Quote:

I used this to strengthen some polygon fills.

 

It's still not clear what "this" is.  Maybe a picture would help.

The topic is already dying, but I am referring to the fact that drawing

wires at existing signals, kinda functions as a route. The new wire will

become a signal with the name of the net you started drawing from (and/or

to). This "net merging" is what behaves strange as it doesnt compare the

layer of the wire you draw with the layer of the signals you draw from/to.

Since points can have several nets on one point (in different layers), this

fails in those cases.

Quote:

The general spacing I use doesnt make the fill between some via's, but

I accept some smaller clearance at some places, and therefore use wire's

between those via's (and rename it to whatever I want) to make the

airwire disappear (after ratsnest).

 

So if I understand this right, you have a polygon with a certain spacing

parameter.  That spacing causes the polygon to be broken up near some vias

because there isn't enough clearance to flow between them?  And in some of

those cases you want to manually add the trace because you know the

clearance is really OK in those areas?  If that's the case, you could have

just said so.  If not, then I'm still confused and a better description is

still needed.

The problem was that there wasn't a problem getting things done. It was just

a weird behavior from eagle in some special cases.

If the above guess as to what you really want is correct, then I still

don't see why you need to use WIRE instead of ROUTE as intended by Eagle.

There is a better chance Eagle understands the connections made by ROUTE,

and the user interface regarding airwires should be clearer.  Have you

tried ROUTE?  Either way you will get lots of DRC errors, so that

shouldn't

be the difference.

Will ROUTE work from a polygon edge? I think not. A WIRE will, but it has to

be renamed.

 

Quote:

You may discuss the correctness of this, but I'm not interested in

hearing right now

 

You started this thread.  Discussing the correct or best use of the tool

is

legitimate and relevant, whether you wish to hear it or not.

I think I got Cadsoft's attention on the "problem" I saw, and I learned that

I should get used to using ROUTE while holding CTRL in the other cases where

I've been using WIRE. Case closed..?